On April 18, 2012, a series of reforms popularly known as the “Geo-location Law” began to take effect. The law reforms the Federal Penal Code, the Federal Penal Procedures, the Telecommunications Federal Law, the Minimum Rules about the Social Rehabilitation of Sentenced Criminals and the National System of Public Security General Law.

On Twitter this matter has been discussed by several users under the hashtag #LeyGeolocalización [es] (Geo-location Law)

What are the reforms about?

Given the current administration's war against organized crime, the reforms mentioned above give the investigation authorities (Federal Public Ministry) the faculty to ask for the geo-localization of mobile equipment (smartphones, tablets, cell phones) if they suspect the device is used to commit a crime [1].

The reform also establishes service providers’ obligation to cooperate promptly and without reservations with authorities, not only to locate the mobile equipment but also to give technical support for the installation and operation of devices that block cell phone signals, radio-communication or data transmission (Internet) inside jails.

These reforms aim to prevent or discourage the theft of telecommunication equipment because they give authorities the right to deactivate or block lines that are related to theft or loss.

After all, the law's sponsors are outstanding figures from the civil society, like Alejandro Martí, President of the Observation System for Citizen Safety (S.O.S.) and Isabel Miranda de Wallace, President of the Stop Kidnapping Association and winner of the National Award for Human Rights in 2010 and PAN's candidate to the mayorship of Mexico City. With such credentials, they can't be wrong, can they?

Well, I'm afraid that even with the argument of authority, this time it failed. The problem, as always, lies in the small print – that is, some paragraphs from the reforms-.

Also, she stated her opinion about the convenience of approving these reforms:

It is a law with good intentions that, as in any “super-power”, only works well in the right hands, but in the wrong hands it could be very harmful. The advocates argue that with this measure the country will live in a secure and just climate. Apparently, the cost will be freedom. Also, its supporters say that those who haven't done wrong have nothing to fear and that if you don't want to be located, you should turn off your phone. That is true, if you don't want to be traced you just have to turn off your cell phone, and surely it is something the targeted kidnappers and mobsters already considered.

On the other hand, Jitten [es] for FayerWayer wrote about the scope of this law, highlighting that investigation authorities can ask for the location of certain devices without a judge's warrant:

Essentially, these legal dispositions establish that cell phone companies must provide data to the Republic's Attorney General (PGR) on the location in real time of an equipment related to a certain phone line, which in writing has good intentions. Alejandro Martí said that “it will be possible to know results of this reform in a medium term when we collect data related to kidnappings and extorsions across the country”.

[The reforms] also take into account that the PGR won't have to ask the provider for this geo-location data with a court order, but only with a “simple letter or by electronic media”. If the provider refuses to provide the information, the judicial authority may fine it with a penalty between 250 and 2,500 days of minimum wage salary (aproximately MXN$155,825 or USD$12,000)

Geraldine Juárez [es] in alt1040 talked about the reforms and questioned that, in her opinion, there were no complaints from citizens:

The Geo-Location Law is part of the Mexican government's legislative tendency to legalize the vulneration of its citizens’ rights. Approved thanks to the pressure of civil groups lead by parents of kidnap victims, Alejandro Martí and the current PAN candidate Isabel Miranda, the law passed by unanimity with 315 votes in favor from the brilliant Mexican congressmen.

In Mexico there were no protests, nobody complained and very few tried to spread information regarding [the law]. It looks like Mexicans don't care about the erosion of their rights.

The blog Human Rights Geek [es] hopes the human rights defense organism in Mexico will fight against the reform:

Fortunately, the National Commission on Human Rights (CNDH) can do something about it, it can present an Action of Unconstitutionality against these provisions and send a clear message to the authority that the erosion of rights is not the way to combat crime.

On Twitter, user Osvaldo Suarez (@paul_suco) [es] pointed out that the right to privacy is not considered in the constitutional text:

Support our work

Global Voices stands out as one of the earliest and strongest examples of how media committed to building community and defending human rights can positively influence how people experience events happening beyond their own communities and national borders.

[…] surveillance practices. Corporations working within the borders of Mexico also worry about a 2012 Mexican law that gives the government unrestricted access to mobile geolocation data provided by the carriers. […]